Suppr超能文献

程序性学习缺陷是否是发育性语言障碍或阅读障碍的因果风险因素?一项元分析综述。

Is a procedural learning deficit a causal risk factor for developmental language disorder or dyslexia? A meta-analytic review.

机构信息

Department of Education, University of Oxford.

Department of Special Needs Education, University of Oslo.

出版信息

Dev Psychol. 2021 May;57(5):749-770. doi: 10.1037/dev0001172.

Abstract

Impaired procedural learning has been suggested as a possible cause of developmental dyslexia (DD) and developmental language disorder (DLD). We evaluate this theory by performing a series of meta-analyses on evidence from the six procedural learning tasks that have most commonly been used to test this theory: the serial reaction time, Hebb learning, artificial grammar and statistical learning, weather prediction, and contextual cuing tasks. Studies using serial reaction time and Hebb learning tasks yielded small group deficits in comparisons between language impaired and typically developing controls ( = -.30 and -.32, respectively). However, a meta-analysis of correlational studies showed that the serial reaction time task was not a reliable correlate of language-related ability in unselected samples ( = .03). Larger group deficits were, however, found in studies using artificial grammar and statistical learning tasks ( = -.48) and the weather prediction task ( = -.63). Possible reasons for the discrepancy in results from different tasks that all purportedly measure procedural learning are highlighted. We conclude that current data do not provide an adequate test of the theory that a generalized procedural learning deficit is a causal risk factor for developmental dyslexia or developmental language disorder. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

摘要

程序性学习障碍被认为是发展性阅读障碍(DD)和发展性语言障碍(DLD)的一个可能原因。我们通过对常用于检验该理论的六项程序性学习任务(序列反应时间任务、赫布学习任务、人工语法和统计学习任务、天气预报任务和语境提示任务)的证据进行一系列元分析来评估这一理论。使用序列反应时间任务和赫布学习任务的研究在语言障碍组与典型对照组之间的比较中显示出较小的群体缺陷(分别为 -.30 和 -.32)。然而,对相关研究的元分析表明,序列反应时间任务在未选择的样本中与语言相关能力之间没有可靠的相关性(=.03)。然而,在使用人工语法和统计学习任务(=.48)和天气预报任务(=.63)的研究中,发现了更大的群体缺陷。我们强调了所有声称测量程序性学习的不同任务的结果存在差异的可能原因。我们的结论是,目前的数据并不能充分检验这样一种理论,即一般性的程序性学习缺陷是发展性阅读障碍或发展性语言障碍的一个因果风险因素。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验